Explore the vast range of titles available.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a multifactorial disease that can possibly affect any part of venous circulation. The risk of VTE increases by about 2 fold in pregnant women and VTE is one of the major causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. For decades superficial vein thrombosis (SVT) has been considered as benign, self-limiting condition, primarily local event consequently being out of scope of well conducted epidemiological and clinical studies. Recently, the approach on SVT has significantly changed considering that prevalence of lower limb SVT is twice higher than both deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). The clinical severity of SVT largely depends on the localization of thrombosis, when it concerns the major superficial vein vessels of the lower limb and particularly the great saphenous vein. If untreated or inadequately treated, SVT can potentially cause DVT or PE. The purpose of this review is to discuss the complex interconnection between SVT and risk factors in pregnancy and to provide evidence-based considerations, suggestions, and recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of this precarious and delicate clinical entity.

Cancer and COVID-19 are both well-established risk factors predisposing to thrombosis. Both disease entities are correlated with increased incidence of venous thrombotic events through multifaceted pathogenic mechanisms involving the interaction of cancer cells or SARS-CoV2 on the one hand and the coagulation system and endothelial cells on the other hand. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients with active cancer and high-risk outpatients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment. Universal thromboprophylaxis with a high prophylactic dose of low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) or therapeutic dose in select patients, is currentlyindicated for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Also, prophylactic anticoagulation is recommended for outpatients with COVID-19 at high risk for thrombosis or disease worsening. However, whether there is an additive risk of thrombosis when a patient with cancer is infected with SARS-CoV2 remains unclear In the current review, we summarize and critically discuss the literature regarding the epidemiology of thrombotic events in patients with cancer and concomitant COVID-19, the thrombotic risk assessment, and the recommendations on thromboprophylaxis for this subgroup of patients. Current data do not support an additive thrombotic risk for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Of note, patients with cancer have less access to intensive care unit care, a setting associated with high thrombotic risk. Based on current evidence, patients with cancer and COVID-19 should be assessed with well-established risk assessment models for medically ill patients and receive thromboprophylaxis, preferentially with LMWH, according to existing recommendations. Prospective trials on well-characterized populations do not exist.

Opioid free anesthesia (OFA) is deffined as anaesthesiological technique where opioids are not used in the intraoperative period (systemic, neuroaxial or intracavitary). Anaphylaxis caused by opioids (fentanyl) is very rare, and the reaction is presented with hypotension and urticaria. When we have proven allergy to fentanyl, patients’ refusal of placing epidural catheter and refusal of receiving bilateral ultrasound guided transversus abdominis plane block (USG TAPB), we must think of using multimodal nonopioide analgesia. The concept of multimodal balanced analgesia is consisted of giving different analgesic drugs in purpose to change the pathophysiological process which is included in nociception, in way to receive more effective intraoperative analgesia with less adverse effects. This is a case report of a 60-year-old male patient scheduled for laparotomic hemicolectomy, who previously had proven allergy to fentanyl. We have decided to give him an opioid free anaesthesia. Before the induction to anaesthesia, the patient would receive dexamethasone (dexasone) 0.1 mg/kg and paracetamol 1 gr intravenously. The patient was induced into general endotracheal anesthesia according to a standardized protocol, with midazolam 0.04 mg/kg, lidocaine hydrochloride 1 mg/kg, propofol 2 mg/kg and rocuronium bromide 0.6 mg/kg. Anaesthesia was maintained by using sevoflurane MAC 1 in order to maintain mean arterial pressure (MAP) with a value of +/- 20% of the original value. After tracheal intubation, the patient had received ketamine hydrochloride 0.5 mg/kg (or 50 mg ketamine) in bolus intravenously and a continuous intravenous infusion with lidocaine hydrochloride (lidocaine) 2 mg/kg/hr and magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) 1,5 gr/hr. At the end of surgery the continuous intravenous infusion with lidocaine and magnesium sulfate was stopped while the abdominal wall was closed and 2.5 g of metamizole (novalgetol) was given intravenously. VAS score 2 hours after surgery was 6/10 and 1 gr of paracetamol was given and the patient was transferred to the Department. Over the next 3 days, the patient had a VAS score of 4-6/10 and only received paracetamol 3x1g and novalgetol 3x1 gr daily, every four hours.